'Traffic Light' On Mars Spotted In NASA Curiosity Rover Photo..
Not sure if this has already been posted..could not find any recent posts...
Conspiracy theorists have gotten the green light to chatter about another strange object on the Red Planet. This time it's not a Mars rat or a jelly doughnut that's been spotted in a photo taken by NASA's Curiosity Mars rover, but a "traffic signal."
The extraterrestrial "signal" was spotted by a British UFO enthusiast named Joseph White. Curiosity snapped the photo at 1:08 a.m. EDT on sol 753 (Sept. 19). You can see the original here.
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/2100108/thumbs/o-MARS-TRAFFIC-LIGHT-570.jpg?6)
"I have been following the images from NASA since the start and I flick through them on the NASA website every day," White said, according to the Western Daily Press. "I saw this one and I thought 'Hang on, that looks a bit strange.'"
While White said he believes what he spotted is "clearly intelligently designed," as he wrote on his latest video on the Youtube Channel ArtAlienTV-Mars Zoo, the formation is most likely just a rock.
Earlier this week, blogger Paul Scott Anderson noticed a weird "ball" on Mars. But NASA scientists said this was just a spherical rock likely formed by concretion, a process by which minerals harden and get compacted, according to Discovery News.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/25/mars-traffic-light_n_5881322.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
I saw that some days ago in another forum, but, at least at the time, I couldn't find another photo showing that area, as the shadow makes me think that we are looking, once more, at a "perspective artefact", something that looks like it does only from this point of view.
I have to look for updates from that day to see if there are more photos now. :)
@Armap : Even if its appaers to stand due to perspective, that doesn't explain the perfectly straight line.
(http://i.imgur.com/fymSSTs.jpg)
Also, this one :
(http://i.imgur.com/cHTR69e.jpg)
QuoteAnd there is also that natural perfectly-shaped ball on a flat rock surface.
According to NASA scientists, the spherical Mars rock is not as big as it looks – it's only about two-fifths of an inch wide, and is most likely a "concretion," a hard solid mass formed by matter accumulation, Discovery News reported.
http://rt.com/news/190624-mars-traffic-lights-rock-curiosity/
But, this one is odd because there are no similar balls in the vicinity. So it really looks out of place.
Well groovey - how many geological occurences form perfect spheres?
Quote from: Senduko on September 26, 2014, 10:36:08 AM
@Armap : Even if its appaers to stand due to perspective, that doesn't explain the perfectly straight line.
(http://i.imgur.com/fymSSTs.jpg)
It may explain it or not, it's hard to say with just one photo.
QuoteBut, this one is odd because there are no similar balls in the vicinity. So it really looks out of place.
I said exactly that on that other forum. :)
Ah lol, great minds? But I would like to know if both images are from the same region, I can't seem to find it anywhere in the articles.
I doesn't look like something that fell out of space because I don't see any signs of impact.
Also, as Sinny asked, can nature form a perfect sphere like that?
Quote from: Senduko on September 26, 2014, 02:39:30 PM
Also, as Sinny asked, can nature form a perfect sphere like that?
Nature can. Spherulites form in igneous rocks, moqui marbles form in Navajo sandstone(which are prized by rock hounds of the southwest), and then there's spheroidal weathering patterns. So, yes. It can happen but it's certainly not common.
That is a very interesting photo though. Too bad there aren't pics from different angles.
Quote from: Senduko on September 26, 2014, 02:39:30 PM
Ah lol, great minds? But I would like to know if both images are from the same region, I can't seem to find it anywhere in the articles.
The photo with the "traffic light" is from sol 753, the photo with the sphere is from sol 746.
According the images below (taken from this site (http://curiosityrover.com/)) and some calculations, it looks like both sites are separated by some 50 metres.
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Sol_746.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Sol_753.jpg)
Edited to add that there must be something wrong with that scale, as it doesn't look like both images show the same. I have to check.
Quote from: Sinny on September 26, 2014, 11:56:38 AM
Well groovey - how many geological occurences form perfect spheres?
THOUSANDS
::)
Judging by the rock where we find the spheres (or as NASA called them "Blueberries") it is easy to see the same SEDIMENTARY layers as we find on Earth. The round spheres are HEMATITE spheres commonly formed in those layers of rock
Like these on the exact same type of rock in Utah
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars/SF1.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars/Hematite_Utah01.jpg)
Of course that Zorgon chap did many pages on those spheres as I recall
::)
Quotehttp://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars/SF2.jpg
Hematite spheres on earth tend to be a dark blackish blue and will rust (Hematite is iron ore and bleeds red when cut)
But on Mars less oxygen and water so they stay blue... hence the NASA nick name "Blueberries"
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars/Rover_Tracks_Blueberries.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars/PilbaraRockOpportunity.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars/Berry_Bowl_060ba2574b7b42c4acb15e60b01145b.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars4/Critters/1P131479514EFF0534P2536L5M1_L4L5L5L5L6_.jpg)
Quote from: Senduko on September 26, 2014, 02:39:30 PM
Also, as Sinny asked, can nature form a perfect sphere like that?
The sphere is common in nature.
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01296/earth-land_1296194c.jpg)
Not least of which is the Living Moon.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/FullMoon2010.jpg/631px-FullMoon2010.jpg)
SOURCE: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/FullMoon2010.jpg/631px-FullMoon2010.jpg
Gold for you Pimander! Lol
Still waiting for some one to name the penomena that caused the sphere...
Hey astr0144, this is an interesting anomaly. Certainly not a "traffic light", but this thing does look a little strange. To me, the shadows do pretty much show the casting off of the segments of this piece, and they seem to be in the right place.
This thing does look odd just standing vertically here, but there is a pretty good chance that it s standing deeper into the sand, in order to remain vertical. One of the "more-odd" parts of this object is the very circular piece at the very top of it (yes, I see a not so distinct image of a face on it, and on the bottom piece too :) ). The circular piece too seems to be a part of the shadow too.
While it doesn't change anything, here is a slightly more magnified same pic of the object.
(http://s22.postimg.org/rotjyiehd/Mars_Traffic_Light_Screen_Shot_2014_09_26_at_8_3.jpg)
Quote from: Pimander on September 26, 2014, 11:32:48 PM
The sphere is common in nature.
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01296/earth-land_1296194c.jpg)
Not least of which is the Living Moon.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/FullMoon2010.jpg/631px-FullMoon2010.jpg)
SOURCE: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/FullMoon2010.jpg/631px-FullMoon2010.jpg
:) - I think the earth is spherical, but it is not a perfect sphere. Also, the word "nature" as we normally use it, probably does not actually apply to spacial objects, unless one considers rotational forces of spacial bodies, and gravitational forces between spacial bodies to be "acts of nature. :))
Quote from: Sinny on September 27, 2014, 01:15:40 AM
Still waiting for some one to name the penomena that caused the sphere...
Always love the lazy ones that expect others to do the leg work :P
::)
(http://www.dzzp.hr/slike_upload/20111018/dzzp201110181537110.jpg)
The stone spheres are mineral aggregates, i.e. spherical nodule structures with a silicate and carbonate composition, measuring from 2–30 cm in diameter, with a laminate internal structure. The geological age of the spheres is from the Upper Cretaceous, likely the Sveti Duh formation. The environment of origin was hemipelagic in the Tethys Ocean, and the origin of the material was organic, likely from plankton or the spikes of fossilized sponges.
The siliceous nodular concretions of varying size and shape appear in rocks of varying age, however the formation of such perfectly shaped nodules requires special environmental conditions (saturation with silica in non-solidified sediment) and their additional value is in the alternation of darker and lighter zones, silicate and carbonate lamellas, as a consequence of the changing chemical conditions during their formation.
The exceptional spherical form of the stone spheres is also a rare example of the mathematical laws of growth and self-structuring of matter in nature, where it is clearly possible to interpret the principles of formation of geological forms.
http://www.dzzp.hr/eng/kategorija/clanak/print.php?id=981
The only place that I personally have found spherical rock balls similar to what Z posted above, was near or along known ground fault lines. And these were just clay colored rocks, but when broken open, there were some sort of crystal projections on the inside. Were very interesting pieces
Quote from: rdunk on September 27, 2014, 02:58:47 AM
While it doesn't change anything, here is a slightly more magnified same pic of the object.
(http://s22.postimg.org/rotjyiehd/Mars_Traffic_Light_Screen_Shot_2014_09_26_at_8_3.jpg)
I would certainly add THIS one to my collection... also look at the flat rectangular piece on the right
I would hazard to say that is some of these odd shaped rocks we find all over Mars are NOT natural, they they are likely weathered pieces of RUINS of an older civilization.
Since I both believe and have evidence of such older civilizations that went to war a long time ago, I find it very likely, nay EXPECT to find odd bits of artifacts strewn all over the map
Those pieces would have been worn down by sand blasting winds over thousands of years.... we find them all over the earth at ancient man sites some bits clearly preserved others barely identifiable
Here is a piece of carved sandstone from a sit in Japan... the entire site is over grown but you can find odd bits like this
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NCMQQPBjWiE/TbPfdbR6wvI/AAAAAAAAHxY/vjL5eT8ilWY/s1600/olympos20.jpg)
Here are a few that have been IDed as man worked but lying in a field of rocks any skeptic could dismiss them, I have found many odd nits like this in many photos...
(http://www.azmnh.org/arch/images/hohokam/stones.png)
Its hard to find example on the net because they tend to show the good finds, not the way it looks before they dug it out
Quote from: rdunk on September 27, 2014, 03:34:43 AM
The only place that I personally have found spherical rock balls similar to what Z posted above, was near or along known ground fault lines. And these were just clay colored rocks, but when broken open, there were some sort of crystal projections on the inside. Were very interesting pieces
Those are what natives call Thunder Eggs They are formed from volcanoes spewing out molten rock. As it falls like a rain drop it forms a sphere because of surface tention. The inside crystalizes and the outside will be crusty. Rockhounds call them GEODES
They are not usually perfect spheres because they form to fast
(http://www.geodegallery.com/uploads/mc300__3__325_inch_whole_coconut_geode_1814_0.jpg)
(http://www.holymackerelstudios.com/catalog/DSCF2560_thumb.JPG)
Quote from: zorgon on September 27, 2014, 03:44:05 AM
Those are what natives call Thunder Eggs They are formed from volcanoes spewing out molten rock. As it falls like a rain drop it forms a sphere because of surface tention. The inside crystalizes and the outside will be crusty. Rockhounds call them GEODES
They are not usually perfect spheres because they form to fast
Yes those are similar to some I found - Some were soccer ball size and almost too heavy for even a young man to carry. But those were not a pretty on the inside as are the typical geodes.
Quote from: Sinny on September 27, 2014, 01:15:40 AM
Still waiting for some one to name the penomena that caused the sphere...
As ArMaP said, it may not be a sphere. To know that you have to have images from more than one angle.
Don't forget, there are spherical geological objects found on Earth and, interesting, they have given rise to tales about ET.
QuoteMisidentification of Megaspherulites
As in the case of meter-scale cannonball concretions, fringe archaeologists and sup-
porters of prehistoric extraterrestrial visitors, i.e. UFO Area (2007), have misidentified
megaspherulites, specifically those found around Cerro Piedra Bola, as artificial stone balls. They argue that they were carved in the prehistoric past by either an alleged lostcivilization of their choice or aliens from outer space. However, arguments for the artificial origin of these megaspherulites are based on various claims including:
1. It is impossible for natural processes to create spherical or quasi-spherical stone
balls.
2. They are "perfectly round-shaped spheres."
3. These stone balls are composed of granite.
All of this has been refuted by what has been published about them.
In addition the authors, who argue for the artificial nature of the megaspherulites
found near Cerro Piedra Bola, consistently overlook facts which contradict such inter-
pretations. Such facts include observations that some of these stone spheres are either "pear shaped," "joined as twins," or have a "dumbbell shape." They also ignore the
fact that these stone balls have eroded out of a 20 to 30 million-year-old ash flow tuff
which completely encased them originally.
Summary
Although rare, megaspherulites form some very spectacular spherical meter-scale
spherical structures. These large and typically, but not always, spherical objects, can
be formed by the cooling and crystallization of rhyolitic lava and ash. They are truly
remarkable features as can be seen in the folklore about prehistoric lost civilizations
and extraterrestrial visitors which the Cerro de Bolas megaspherulites in the Sierra deAmeca have generated.
Megaspherulites
by Paul V. Heinrich.THE BACKBENDER'S GAZETTE,JULY 2007 (http://www.hgms.org/BBG/Jul07.pdf)
Quote from: rdunk on September 27, 2014, 02:58:47 AM
Hey astr0144, this is an interesting anomaly. Certainly not a "traffic light", but this thing does look a little strange. To me, the shadows do pretty much show the casting off of the segments of this piece, and they seem to be in the right place.
To me, the shadows appear to show that the "traffic light" is made of three different pieces, with only one (the one in the back being the only one with two vertically aligned protrusions).
Looking at the shadows of all the rocks we can get an idea of Sun's position and the direction of the shadows, that I suppose it's something like this:
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/0753ML0032370000400001E01_DXXX_1.jpg)
Now, if what we are looking at was something like a traffic light, the shadow should be just one, like the shadow of the objects 3 and 4, but we can see that the shadows are in the same relative positions as the shadows of the small rocky ridge on the right, meaning that the objects projection those shadows are aligned in the same direction as that small rocky ridge.
I hope that makes sense. :)
PS: if I knew how to use Blender I could try to make a 3D scene to replicate what I mean, I will try to do it if I have the time.
Quote from: zorgon on September 27, 2014, 03:28:31 AM
(http://www.dzzp.hr/slike_upload/20111018/dzzp201110181537110.jpg)
I ponder a "natural" object with such obvious tool marks.... LOL!
(http://i1156.photobucket.com/albums/p572/AmaterasuSolar/Mobile%20Uploads/TriangleSphere.png~original)
I mean... How do We know this object is "natural," when We know there was SOME tooling done?
Greetings:
It would seem to be of interest that NASA claims this incredible resolution,
yet NASA photos of the moon are blurred, out-of-focus, etc. :P
QuoteAccording to NASA scientists, the spherical Mars rock is not as big as it looks –
it's only about two-fifths of an inch wide, and is most likely a "concretion,"
a hard solid mass formed by matter accumulation, Discovery News reported.
ArMaP, can you help us out here?
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Bluebird/lg50aa500a.gif)
tfw
Peace Love Light
Liberty & Equality or RevolutionHec'el oinipikte (that we shall live)
Quote from: thorfourwinds on September 28, 2014, 02:35:01 AM
It would seem to be of interest that NASA claims this incredible resolution,
yet NASA photos of the moon are blurred, out-of-focus, etc. :P
Two different situations, the photos of the Moon are taken from orbit, these photos from Curiosity are taken from the ground, just some metres or centimetres away from the target.
Also, can you point to any of those "blurred, out-of-focus" photos?
QuoteArMaP, can you help us out here?
Some time ago, Clark Andersen made a program (AlgorimancerPG (http://www.clarkandersen.com/RangeFinder.htm)) to give us information about size and distance of the objects in the Mars rovers' photos, but for that it needs two photos from the left and right camera. As Curiosity's two Mastcams have different lens it doesn't work with Mastcam photos, even if we had two photos of that scene, which we do not.
I think that, knowing the lens characteristics and the distance to the object, it's possible to know the object's size, or, knowing the size, it's possible to know the distance, but I don't know if it's possible to get both the distance and size when we only know the field of view of the lens.
I have to do some searching. :)